IEsnare
- Skaggerak
- Pro
- Karma: 1
Post
Re: IEsnare
It's nice to see some mainstream reporting on it, would be great if this could build some momentum towards something but I'm not too excited. The fact a guy won in court regarding it is a great sign, would probably need a lot more cases for it to change things though.
- Thordin
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 30
Post
Re: IEsnare
they will just add some more text on their cookie acceptance policy.
Still, its good news we are hearing from media that bookies only want losers, that if you are a potential liability they kick you out.
All those mug gamblers now will realise that their bookies, and the smart people that work for them, think they are losers, with no clue, with no edge.
Still, its good news we are hearing from media that bookies only want losers, that if you are a potential liability they kick you out.
All those mug gamblers now will realise that their bookies, and the smart people that work for them, think they are losers, with no clue, with no edge.
- dealer wins
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 43
Post
Re: IEsnare
Not good news really, as selfish as it sounds we need mug punters to sustain our income. Without mugs the bookies will fold.Thordin wrote: they will just add some more text on their cookie acceptance policy.
Still, its good news we are hearing from media that bookies only want losers, that if you are a potential liability they kick you out.
All those mug gamblers now will realise that their bookies, and the smart people that work for them, think they are losers, with no clue, with no edge.
Never trust a goose!!!
- barbero
- To become a Pro
- Karma: 27
Post
Re: IEsnare
I don't believe the fact of mugs realising they are mugs can possibly ever have such an impact, dealer. I mean, I'm sure you've seen bookies' p&l statements and they're doing fine
If anything, putting this kind of pressure could - perhaps this is optimistic? - make them reconsider their policy on limitations, maybe some day establishing some kind of min bet for everyone, etc
In any case, I find that any kind of activity that puts pressure on bookies concerning their worst practices - account closure, limitations, odds correction, privacy, etc - especially through making them public, is a positive activity. Even if we cannot predict where it would take us... sure it could lead to a worse scenario
Unfortunately like Skag pointed out it would need many more cases, and there's too few of us out there who care for gambling regulation to improve, and really few or none who cares and also has the ability to foster such change.
If anything, putting this kind of pressure could - perhaps this is optimistic? - make them reconsider their policy on limitations, maybe some day establishing some kind of min bet for everyone, etc
In any case, I find that any kind of activity that puts pressure on bookies concerning their worst practices - account closure, limitations, odds correction, privacy, etc - especially through making them public, is a positive activity. Even if we cannot predict where it would take us... sure it could lead to a worse scenario
Unfortunately like Skag pointed out it would need many more cases, and there's too few of us out there who care for gambling regulation to improve, and really few or none who cares and also has the ability to foster such change.
- Skaggerak
- Pro
- Karma: 1
Post
Re: IEsnare
In what way would this change things?Thordin wrote: they will just add some more text on their cookie acceptance policy.
- Bubbles
- To become a Pro
- Karma: 8
Post
Re: IEsnare
If they are forced to legally accept that iesnere is not a cookie but something else (whatever they call it) they will dress it in nice words and add to their cookie acceptance policy/ t&c which are not negotiable and that's it.Skaggerak wrote:In what way would this change things?Thordin wrote: they will just add some more text on their cookie acceptance policy.